[theme-reviewers] New Ticket Resolution

[Chip Bennett]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Edward Caissie
<edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:

> If the license declaration is accurately conveying GPL compliance I would
> likely approve the theme, even if it is not letter-compliant to the
> "Guideline" ... we will be taking the next step with version 3.1 by giving
> them a full example of what to be expected. Essentially a copy and paste
> block, as I understood it, that will meet the guidelines and therefore
> become an easily enforced "requirement".
>
> As to existing themes not meeting the exact requirement at this time, but
> still clearly conveying the theme is being released under a GPL-compatible
> license, I would suggest using the "new" format but I would not hold it
> against the theme until the above is implemented.
>

So, basically: you would ignore the current requirement?

Themes are *required* to declare their license explicitly, using one of the
following methods:

   - Adding *License* and *License URI* header slugs to style.css
   - Including a *license.txt* file with the Theme

Is this a case of selective enforcement?

>
> To be honest, and I have been struggling with the wording for some time,
> "Guideline" and "requirement" should not be used in the same sentence IMO.
> It is either one or the other in simpler thinking.


I think it's semantics, but perhaps relevant, if misunderstood. The
Guidelines are a collection of criteria, and those criteria are classified
as *required*, *recommended*, or *optional*. I don't see how it is
wrong/confusing/redundant/whatever to say "required guideline" or
"recommended guideline" or "optional guideline". Would "criteria" be a
preferable term to "guideline"?


> That being said, I treat the CSS validation as more a guideline than a
> requirement; and, I make every effort to stay consistent in how I approach
> the CSS when reviewing a theme.
>
> And again:

Themes are *required* to utilize current recognized version(s) of (X)HTML
and CSS. Test using one of the following methods:


So is this another case of selective enforcement?

If we're selectively enforcing the Guidelines, as opposed to allowing
something to remain unfixed but only until the next revision, then we
definitely need to take a look at the Guidelines again. AFAIK, either we
enforce them, or we don't. That's the whole point of providing objective
criteria and performing consistent, objective, and fair reviews.

Chip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20101014/63e996ee/attachment.htm>